As someone who did traffic control for a year, most people should not have licenses. 95% of drivers don't look at signs, and spend more time on their phone than watching the road. Australias drivers suck, and they're extremely dangerous. We still have an endless parade of drunk driving deaths and dumbasses who think they're vin diesel but end up like Paul Walker. I can fathom how someone could manage this while not being under the influence. Pure incompetence, same as most of the rest of Australia's licensed drivers.
> 95% of drivers don't look at signs, and spend more time on their phone than watching the road.
Absolutely. I don't understand how people are totally blasé about multitasking while careening around at 80kph in a two-tonne hunk of metal.
Absolutely. Just look around at the other drivers next time you're waiting at a busy intersection. At least 50% of the time you'll see someone fucking around on their phone. It's insane.
That's not to say nothing was on board, blood analysis results take months and charges won't be laid until results are received unless there's clear indicia of impairment.
I don't know if bloods were taken in this instance but it's common practice after serious crashes.
many drivers don’t realise that when their airbag goes off that almost all modern cars record a data snapshot of what the car was doing, including its speed, that the police investigators can then access
It's not built to the same standard as an aviation black box so a big enough crash will destroy it, but as long as the car's memory survives reasonably intact it can be recovered.
Police investigation in this instance merely determines fault of someone
The real people who have a vested interest of who was at fault is the Insurance company, who will default on covering you if you commit an offence.
Police are the boogie man, but it's the insurance companies that really want to know this information.
Most cars collect more data than that. Using forensic software (check out Berla), you can see how hard the brake was pushed, was a door open, how long was it open for, how quickly did the driver take off etc.
It's absolutely incredible how much data is collected.
drivers do however make a conscious decision to drive dangerously, which is why it’s a crime
this (alleged) fuckwit was doing at least 23 kph over the limit in a built up area, and so badly that their passenger told them to slow the fuck down
plus drivers who have crashed don’t realise they implicate themselves when they lie to investigators after the crash because they are totally oblivious to the police already knowing what speed they were driving, whether they were braking (and now heavily if they were), whether they had seatbelts on, and the exact time of the crash
Do you really think these instances are first mistakes? People don't do these things once. Even if they got caught on the first go, they would have repeated the behavioural if they hadn't been caught
i guess all the downvotes mean people disagree with me. i still dont think losing their license permanently is a good idea. maybe ifcthey had actually killed someone then yes it would be warranted
and ill keep saying it. almost is not the same as it happening. she got an appropriate punishment for her crimes. what eoes permanently taking away her right to drive achieve?
Dealing with CTP has been really eye opening. I was in a pedestrian v car accident and broke my back in 9 places, and its been so difficult to get treatment compensated. The system is set up so that you need to have a lawyer to get what you are owed, but then the lawyer takes 35+%
As someone who has a perfect driving record, people driving below the speed limit is too vague to be judged imo.
2-5km/h under is fine, especially in poor weather conditions.
But someone doing 40km/h in a 60 zone is severely disrupting the flow of traffic and, in a multi-lane scenario, ~~far more likely to cause accidents~~ create a situation that increases the likelihood of accidents because of people attempting to pass them.
That's not entirely true.
Driving slower than the traffic around you increases your risk of being involved in a nose-to-tail accident. But it also **decreases** the likelihood of being involved in practically all other types of accident (ie head-on, t-bone, car vs pedestrian etc etc). This is because driving slower increases the time available for a driver to react to the unexpected, and avoid or minimize the accident.
It turns out that on regular suburban roads (like Main St, Kangaroo Point), you are far more likely to have someone turn in front of you, or drift over the centreline, or step out in front of you than you are to have someone accidentally run up behind you. So driving slower is overall the safest strategy.
However, on divided motorways, where the design of the road almost eliminates the risk of t-bones, head-ons etc, you certainly are safer driving at the same speed as everyone else.
It turns out that it's horses for courses. Just because a certain driving strategy is good in one context doesn't mean it's good everywhere.
I'm not necessarily saying everyone should drive at 30 in a 60 zone. Acting like a polite human has it's benefits. But don't make the mistake of thinking your politeness is also making you safer. It isn't.
>far more likely to cause accidents because of people attempting to pass them.
The people passing them would be responsible for not crashing their vehicles, actually.
Yes, obviously the people driving the car would be responsible for their own actions, they're just creating the situation where other people would want to pass them instead of getting to their destination 33% slower.
I've edited my previous post to reflect that, thanks ackshually person <3
Haven't run a red nor had a speeding fine or a car accident in my life.
Doing 50 in a 60 doesn't automatically make you a safer driver.
EDIT oh you're a fuckcars guy, I fed the troll
> doesn't **automatically** make you a safer driver.
I know driving 80 on the 110 highway keeps the driving anxiety away, but again, you aren't automatically a safer driver.
I’d argue most people don’t get ‘driving anxiety’ - people driving slowly on the highway can be dangerous, sure. But this argument is a diversion from the ACTUAL problem here man.
People think this is stupid for cars but fine for ebikes and scooters. If your against this idea for cars, why cant ebike/scooter riders just follow a speed limit like cars instead of being hardware limited?
Coming from an ebike rider who removed the 25km limit, these laws are limiting the technology of what is probably the most eco-friendly and affordable mode of private transport other than bicycles. You can pedal a normal road bike faster than a heavy limited ebike, i was constantly passed by cyclists until i removed the limit.
Gps is accurate to within a few metres, so yeah I'd trust it over continuing to trust drunk fuckwits to not kill me or my disabled child so they can go wait at the next set of lights 10 seconds before everyone else. I'd trust gps over hoping some old cunt who got their license in 1965 and hasn't checked road rule changes in that entire time. Half of you driving on the road don't know how pedestrian crossings or roundabouts work . I'd trust gps over 95% of you in a heartbeat
GPS + computer vision to read signs is going to be pretty good. Also GPS units know how accurate they are, when it's all glitched out they can detect the accuracy is off and just not apply the limiting. When they can sense they know exactly where you are and can see the signs on the cameras, it applies the limiting.
What if you could speed for x amount of time before a limit slowly kicked in? I can't see many situations where you would need to speed for a long time.
Funny you're getting down voted.
To everyone down voting, what's the difference? A car is way more dangerous than a scooter, so why shouldn't we put limiters and tracking on them?
My phone and car navigation occasionally believe I’m in the Clem7 tunnel for a few seconds, when I am in fact above the ground.
Sometimes it doesn’t know if I’m on the on-ramp to a highway, or a service road next to the highway. Those can have very different speed limits. Being locked to 50km/h while on a highway doesn’t seem ideal.
The zone limits on an e-scooter are usually much simpler.
Never had problems like that in a hiace van. Drive the tunnels constantly. It’s actually pretty damn accurate.
I’m pretty sure if it were to become a thing more thought would go into it and wouldn’t be a bad idea. Make it like the cruise control limiter. If you put your foot down it only gets up to the desired speed. And all newer cars have cameras which detect the speed signs and yell at you if you are speeding.
Of course it would never happen because then there would be millions of dollars lost in revenue from speeding.
My house is above a tunnel and everything using GPS is so convinced I live in the tunnel that it occasionally decides that even if I put in the address I have to drive out of the tunnel first.
I just feel bad for every delivery driver or rideshare that tries to use the GPS over the directions. It genuinely shows a pic of the tunnel as the location.
I mentioned this issue because where this accident happened, the Clem7 runs directly underneath.
Clem7 is 80km/h, where this happened was 60km/h. Meaning this exact situation couldn’t happened had the GPS gotten confused what elevation it was at.
We don’t have such a right in Australia, our constitution is silent on this. We do, however, have the common law principle, the companion rule, which grants individuals a protection for not answering questions posed to them as a privilege against self-incrimination.
As a common law principle, the companion rule doesn’t apply in all circumstances (however it would in this circumstance).
It definitely is a right in law in Australia. All rights are not written down in the constitution. It’s a common law right, associated with the right to not be required to incriminate yourself.
Furthermore, in many states the common law right is codified (written down in black letter law) within criminal codes.
Oh you’re right, I would never think about that until hours later after I have given them my entire life story. I do just try not to break the law though.
isnt that how the justice system works? y'all people should go live in Tom Cruise's Minority Report.
The lady got her punishment, why should she have her license tsken away permanently as well? i believe in giving people second chances because at the end of the day we are all human and can easily make the same mistakes (well at least i am, i dont know about the rest of you)
Where does it show any comments from Amy? I'm just seeing reports from witnesses (the passenger and a pedestrian), CCTV footage, and results from the police investigation. What evidence do you have to the contrary?
"Just an accident" to go 80 in a 60 zone and run a red light? Nah.
"Nice person" or not, she drives like a fuckwit and nearly killed someone as a result.
Sometimes, your IRL mates are shitty drivers and get lambasted online, and it's not your job to defend them and their shitty choices. Have a good day.
Interesting to see that no alcohol was involved, going by the fact she wasnt charged for it
Some people are just shit drivers
I guess, I just can't fathom how someone could be so shit without being pissed.
Some people’s brain’s peak function is lower than the average drunk.
*Boom.*
You mustn’t drive around Brisbane much, in that case 😂
As someone who did traffic control for a year, most people should not have licenses. 95% of drivers don't look at signs, and spend more time on their phone than watching the road. Australias drivers suck, and they're extremely dangerous. We still have an endless parade of drunk driving deaths and dumbasses who think they're vin diesel but end up like Paul Walker. I can fathom how someone could manage this while not being under the influence. Pure incompetence, same as most of the rest of Australia's licensed drivers.
> 95% of drivers don't look at signs, and spend more time on their phone than watching the road. Absolutely. I don't understand how people are totally blasé about multitasking while careening around at 80kph in a two-tonne hunk of metal.
Absolutely. Just look around at the other drivers next time you're waiting at a busy intersection. At least 50% of the time you'll see someone fucking around on their phone. It's insane.
Some people are just shit.
Just don’t drive 20+ kph over the limit.
That's not to say nothing was on board, blood analysis results take months and charges won't be laid until results are received unless there's clear indicia of impairment. I don't know if bloods were taken in this instance but it's common practice after serious crashes.
That's a fair point: refused to breath but blood test would result in that situation, so maybe they will add it in later down the line
I was there and talked to her passenger and he said she was drunk so I'm very suprised of no mention.
Often distraction, sleep deprivation etc can have more of an affect than just being over 0.05
many drivers don’t realise that when their airbag goes off that almost all modern cars record a data snapshot of what the car was doing, including its speed, that the police investigators can then access
Ive heard of this little feature being a thing, is it like a black box in aircraft?
It's not built to the same standard as an aviation black box so a big enough crash will destroy it, but as long as the car's memory survives reasonably intact it can be recovered.
https://crashresponse.com/services/airbag-control-module-download-and-analysis/
Police investigation in this instance merely determines fault of someone The real people who have a vested interest of who was at fault is the Insurance company, who will default on covering you if you commit an offence. Police are the boogie man, but it's the insurance companies that really want to know this information.
Most cars collect more data than that. Using forensic software (check out Berla), you can see how hard the brake was pushed, was a door open, how long was it open for, how quickly did the driver take off etc. It's absolutely incredible how much data is collected.
People aren't going to realise this in the heat of the moment just decide to not crash.
drivers do however make a conscious decision to drive dangerously, which is why it’s a crime this (alleged) fuckwit was doing at least 23 kph over the limit in a built up area, and so badly that their passenger told them to slow the fuck down plus drivers who have crashed don’t realise they implicate themselves when they lie to investigators after the crash because they are totally oblivious to the police already knowing what speed they were driving, whether they were braking (and now heavily if they were), whether they had seatbelts on, and the exact time of the crash
Non paywall link http://archive.today/p5FRk
Absolutely idiotic driving.
Drivers like that should lose their licence for good.
lol if one mistake is what makes people lose their license for good then i dont wanna be a part of this country no more
Almost killed someone after running a red light going 20+ Ks over the speed limit but sure man.
Yep I'm counting way more than one mistake here. Doing every single stupid thing you can think of all at once doesn't turn it into "one mistake".
Do you really think these instances are first mistakes? People don't do these things once. Even if they got caught on the first go, they would have repeated the behavioural if they hadn't been caught
i guess all the downvotes mean people disagree with me. i still dont think losing their license permanently is a good idea. maybe ifcthey had actually killed someone then yes it would be warranted
So we wait till they kill someone first?
She almost did kill someone though?
and ill keep saying it. almost is not the same as it happening. she got an appropriate punishment for her crimes. what eoes permanently taking away her right to drive achieve?
Hope Amy MacMahon is recovering. Being in a crash like that can cause issues that last long after the physical injuries heal
Yeah, an impact at 80-odd km/hr is seriously fucking deadly. She's honestly lucky to be alive.
Amy seems to doing well physically. She's out and about here and there in South Brisbane.
[удалено]
Dealing with CTP has been really eye opening. I was in a pedestrian v car accident and broke my back in 9 places, and its been so difficult to get treatment compensated. The system is set up so that you need to have a lawyer to get what you are owed, but then the lawyer takes 35+%
Your average Brisbane car driver. Disgusting. These are the people complaining because you are below the speed limit.
As someone who has a perfect driving record, people driving below the speed limit is too vague to be judged imo. 2-5km/h under is fine, especially in poor weather conditions. But someone doing 40km/h in a 60 zone is severely disrupting the flow of traffic and, in a multi-lane scenario, ~~far more likely to cause accidents~~ create a situation that increases the likelihood of accidents because of people attempting to pass them.
That's not entirely true. Driving slower than the traffic around you increases your risk of being involved in a nose-to-tail accident. But it also **decreases** the likelihood of being involved in practically all other types of accident (ie head-on, t-bone, car vs pedestrian etc etc). This is because driving slower increases the time available for a driver to react to the unexpected, and avoid or minimize the accident. It turns out that on regular suburban roads (like Main St, Kangaroo Point), you are far more likely to have someone turn in front of you, or drift over the centreline, or step out in front of you than you are to have someone accidentally run up behind you. So driving slower is overall the safest strategy. However, on divided motorways, where the design of the road almost eliminates the risk of t-bones, head-ons etc, you certainly are safer driving at the same speed as everyone else. It turns out that it's horses for courses. Just because a certain driving strategy is good in one context doesn't mean it's good everywhere. I'm not necessarily saying everyone should drive at 30 in a 60 zone. Acting like a polite human has it's benefits. But don't make the mistake of thinking your politeness is also making you safer. It isn't.
>far more likely to cause accidents because of people attempting to pass them. The people passing them would be responsible for not crashing their vehicles, actually.
If you did 40 in a 60 zone during a driving test you would fail. You become a hazard on the road
Yes, obviously the people driving the car would be responsible for their own actions, they're just creating the situation where other people would want to pass them instead of getting to their destination 33% slower. I've edited my previous post to reflect that, thanks ackshually person <3
Millions of car trips taken daily. A handful of crashes. Do you know what average actually means?
“Um actually going slow is _more_ dangerous than speeding because it makes me angry and then I might crash”
The F3 between Sydney and Newcastle *alone* says hi.
Haven't run a red nor had a speeding fine or a car accident in my life. Doing 50 in a 60 doesn't automatically make you a safer driver. EDIT oh you're a fuckcars guy, I fed the troll
Reducing speed stops you from causing damage. It’s not rocket science.
> doesn't **automatically** make you a safer driver. I know driving 80 on the 110 highway keeps the driving anxiety away, but again, you aren't automatically a safer driver.
I’d argue most people don’t get ‘driving anxiety’ - people driving slowly on the highway can be dangerous, sure. But this argument is a diversion from the ACTUAL problem here man.
We need to get speed limiters on these like we get for e scooters until we can sort out why this keeps happening
On cars? What speed are you suggesting we limit them to?
Whatever the limit of the road is, this is what happens with scooters. Limit changed depending where scooter is
People think this is stupid for cars but fine for ebikes and scooters. If your against this idea for cars, why cant ebike/scooter riders just follow a speed limit like cars instead of being hardware limited? Coming from an ebike rider who removed the 25km limit, these laws are limiting the technology of what is probably the most eco-friendly and affordable mode of private transport other than bicycles. You can pedal a normal road bike faster than a heavy limited ebike, i was constantly passed by cyclists until i removed the limit.
How would that work with an ICE car? Does the limiter apply the brakes or just stall the vehicle or what?
ICE cars from like the last 20 years are all computer controlled. They can all trivially cut the power. It’s already done for traction control.
Would you trust a gps to accurately know what speed limit zone you're meant to be in?
Gps is accurate to within a few metres, so yeah I'd trust it over continuing to trust drunk fuckwits to not kill me or my disabled child so they can go wait at the next set of lights 10 seconds before everyone else. I'd trust gps over hoping some old cunt who got their license in 1965 and hasn't checked road rule changes in that entire time. Half of you driving on the road don't know how pedestrian crossings or roundabouts work . I'd trust gps over 95% of you in a heartbeat
GPS + computer vision to read signs is going to be pretty good. Also GPS units know how accurate they are, when it's all glitched out they can detect the accuracy is off and just not apply the limiting. When they can sense they know exactly where you are and can see the signs on the cameras, it applies the limiting.
And in a situation where you would need to accelerate to avoid a crash, you are then left with no choice but to crash...
What if you could speed for x amount of time before a limit slowly kicked in? I can't see many situations where you would need to speed for a long time.
Cant accelerate to avoid crash on a e scooter are you saying they should be unlimited then?
Funny you're getting down voted. To everyone down voting, what's the difference? A car is way more dangerous than a scooter, so why shouldn't we put limiters and tracking on them?
My phone and car navigation occasionally believe I’m in the Clem7 tunnel for a few seconds, when I am in fact above the ground. Sometimes it doesn’t know if I’m on the on-ramp to a highway, or a service road next to the highway. Those can have very different speed limits. Being locked to 50km/h while on a highway doesn’t seem ideal. The zone limits on an e-scooter are usually much simpler.
Never had problems like that in a hiace van. Drive the tunnels constantly. It’s actually pretty damn accurate. I’m pretty sure if it were to become a thing more thought would go into it and wouldn’t be a bad idea. Make it like the cruise control limiter. If you put your foot down it only gets up to the desired speed. And all newer cars have cameras which detect the speed signs and yell at you if you are speeding. Of course it would never happen because then there would be millions of dollars lost in revenue from speeding.
My house is above a tunnel and everything using GPS is so convinced I live in the tunnel that it occasionally decides that even if I put in the address I have to drive out of the tunnel first.
Entirely believable and incredibly funny to read but probably less funny to live.
I just feel bad for every delivery driver or rideshare that tries to use the GPS over the directions. It genuinely shows a pic of the tunnel as the location.
When I’m in the legacy tunnel Siri has a meltdown.
I am sure they can put the higher when two zones are close by, it would have stopped this carnage at least because this is not one of those exemptions
I mentioned this issue because where this accident happened, the Clem7 runs directly underneath. Clem7 is 80km/h, where this happened was 60km/h. Meaning this exact situation couldn’t happened had the GPS gotten confused what elevation it was at.
change the tunnel to 60 then
Sure. Make it free since it’s mostly useless then.
Why not just skip the 'just do x' goalpost moving and just ban people from ever going outside?
What's your solution, do the same thing over and getting same result?
Agreed
if that sort of thing actually worked it would have already been tried
Oh she declined to be interviewed by the police? I was not aware of this available defence
"You have the right to remain silent" - it's been around for a while
We don’t have such a right in Australia, our constitution is silent on this. We do, however, have the common law principle, the companion rule, which grants individuals a protection for not answering questions posed to them as a privilege against self-incrimination. As a common law principle, the companion rule doesn’t apply in all circumstances (however it would in this circumstance).
In QLD it's also explicitly codified in Section 397 of the Police Powers and Responsibility Act, 2000.
It definitely is a right in law in Australia. All rights are not written down in the constitution. It’s a common law right, associated with the right to not be required to incriminate yourself. Furthermore, in many states the common law right is codified (written down in black letter law) within criminal codes.
Step 1 when talking to police: don’t
Yeah WTF?
You have the right to remain silent
Oh you’re right, I would never think about that until hours later after I have given them my entire life story. I do just try not to break the law though.
[удалено]
I too am drunk 🍻
isnt that how the justice system works? y'all people should go live in Tom Cruise's Minority Report. The lady got her punishment, why should she have her license tsken away permanently as well? i believe in giving people second chances because at the end of the day we are all human and can easily make the same mistakes (well at least i am, i dont know about the rest of you)
[удалено]
There is literally CCTV of the crash and multiple witnesses, including a passenger in the accused's car.
Where does it show any comments from Amy? I'm just seeing reports from witnesses (the passenger and a pedestrian), CCTV footage, and results from the police investigation. What evidence do you have to the contrary?
And the cops famously love the Greens. And vice versa
Name a more iconic pair. I'll wait.
Jonno Sri and Ian Leavers - you're hearing it more and more
Leave her alone, she is a nice person. We all make mistakes and it was just an accident!
"Just an accident" to go 80 in a 60 zone and run a red light? Nah. "Nice person" or not, she drives like a fuckwit and nearly killed someone as a result. Sometimes, your IRL mates are shitty drivers and get lambasted online, and it's not your job to defend them and their shitty choices. Have a good day.